Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ooh good idea!!
I'll throw my supports behind him & anyone who endorses healthier options to vaccines
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Everything that Dr. Hyman said in that short video clip that believe posted was accurate and reasonable. He cited the Cochrane Collaboration studies regarding efficacy. He recommended certain groups getting the flu vaccine. He discussed different options, such as the mercury free vaccines and discussed the fact that mercury is toxic and that the lifetime accumulation is probably harmful to health. He briefly touched on nutrition to stay healthy. What's so "woo" about that?
Hmmm....Idk, lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by trettep
I bought one of Hyman's books. Good stuff. The guy is a straight shooter.
I'm going to browse his books, too- any suggestions?
I love how informative & knowledgeable he is.
Ooh good idea!!
I'll throw my supports behind him & anyone who endorses healthier options to vaccines
Hmmm....Idk, lol
I'm going to browse his books, too- any suggestions?
I love how informative & knowledgeable he is.
I had the blood sugar connection or something like that. Was pretty good book although I am pretty keen on health issues so some of it was not new to me.
I explained to you in another thread that the author of that article is either ignorant of how to calculate vaccine effectiveness, or, worse, deliberately misleading. Before you re-post the link again, why not get a statistician to show you why.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Did you even watch the video? It was only a few minutes long. The doctor made clear that the multi-dose contains mercury (which is what most people get) and let them know that they have other options. Many people do not know that and would know even think to ask. All that the Dr. did was educate them about their options.
Mercury is a known toxin. Of course it's not harmless. The science regarding mercury in vaccines is not settled. The pharmaceutical companies are in the business of selling vaccines. Why do you never consider that to be a conflict of interest considering they are, oftentimes, funding the studies that support their products (vaccines). You're instead worried about people selling supplements. What's weird is that even if someone agreed with Hyman, that person has a huge variety of supplement brands to choose from so the likelihood of him making a profit based on his information is not that great.
Regarding the Cochrane review. They also found flu vaccines very ineffective. Even if there were zero risks (not true because there are) why would I take a vaccine for something that is not effective?
PS, I won't read your pro-vaccine propaganda blogs so if you're posting them for me, you're wasting your time. They are totally biased.
Yes, I watched the video. As I said, the target audience is those, like yourself, who do not wish to use vaccines and can be steered toward supplements instead. Hyman appears to be doing well. The website brings in over $100 K per year estimated, and his medical office LLC, though which he sells supplements, has an estimated $500 K to $1 million per year in revenue. The LLC that sells the books brings in an estimated $100 K or more per year, but since he has a number of books and touts them as "#1 best sellers" that would either seem low or he is over-hyping his sales. Why is the fact that he uses the video to sell his books and supplements not considered a conflict of interest?
The science regarding mercury in vaccines is settled. There is no evidence that it is harmful, and if you believe it is, surely you completely avoid eating or drinking anything with methyl mercury in it, I assume. Do you allow your family to eat fish?
Most of the vaccine supply in the US is single dose syringes, 105 million out of 150 to 156 doses expected to be supplied this year:
If you want mercury free flu vaccine, you may have it. If you get the vaccine from a multidose vial, the preservative in it is not going to harm you.
The conclusion of the Cochrane review:
"Influenza vaccines have a very modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost in the general population, including pregnant women." The majority of studies they included were not sponsored by industry.
So they did not find "flu vaccines are very ineffective".
I explained to you in another thread that the author of that article is either ignorant of how to calculate vaccine effectiveness, or, worse, deliberately misleading. Before you re-post the link again, why not get a statistician to show you why.
I think the crux of the article is how those that promote and market vaccines are the ones that are misleading. They broke it down very well. It is a very remarkable attack on the spin of vaccine efficacy.
Trace amounts of the toxin remain and remain, flu shot after flu shot, year after year, and season after season.
I think anyone here should understand that.
Sigh.
You can get flu vaccine without any preservative if you want it, since you prefer to believe what that fraud Wakefield promoted rather than real scientists.
I had the blood sugar connection or something like that. Was pretty good book although I am pretty keen on health issues so some of it was not new to me.
For the record, the way you quoted in that post makes it look like I said something that I did not.
You can get flu vaccine without any preservative if you want it, since you prefer to believe what that fraud Wakefield promoted rather than real scientists.
Did you even watch the video? It was only a few minutes long. The doctor made clear that the multi-dose contains mercury (which is what most people get) and let them know that they have other options. Many people do not know that and would know even think to ask. All that the Dr. did was educate them about their options.
Mercury is a known toxin. Of course it's not harmless. The science regarding mercury in vaccines is not settled. The pharmaceutical companies are in the business of selling vaccines. Why do you never consider that to be a conflict of interest considering they are, oftentimes, funding the studies that support their products (vaccines). You're instead worried about people selling supplements. What's weird is that even if someone agreed with Hyman, that person has a huge variety of supplement brands to choose from so the likelihood of him making a profit based on his information is not that great.
Regarding the Cochrane review. They also found flu vaccines very ineffective. Even if there were zero risks (not true because there are) why would I take a vaccine for something that is not effective?
PS, I won't read your pro-vaccine propaganda blogs so if you're posting them for me, you're wasting your time. They are totally biased.
Cochrane did not say the bold. They said a "modest efficacy", and NO adverse reactions in the studies they reviewed. If something is modestly effective and has no adverse reactions, why not do it?
And to reiterate for all those who apparently do not read back into a thread once they start posting, THIMEROSAL FREE FLU SHOTS ARE AVAILABLE AND THERE IS NO THIMEROSAL IN FLU MIST.
After all it says it can stop all viruses. Probably none of you have donated to the Draco fund have you?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
